• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Dale Steyn vs Allan Donald vs Shaun Pollock

Who is the better bowler?


  • Total voters
    120

sobers no:1

Banned
1.akram
2.donald

imo

followed by ambrose , mcgrath , murali , steyn, warne and waquar

ODI stats should be taken seriously in DONALD vs STEYN in this thread. ( hav a look on first page)
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Ya he along with Donald were the best bowlers of that period, imo.

Akram is massively over rated.
Really? I reckon he's underrated if anything.

Heard Border say once he was the bowler he least enjoyed facing.
 

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
Really? I reckon he's underrated if anything.

Heard Border say once he was the bowler he least enjoyed facing.
I'll always look at him in the Cricinfo All Time XI and wonder if he's only there because he bowls left arm. Magnificent bowler no doubt, but I do reckon he's probably slightly overrated when compared to other bowlers at the time.
 

L Trumper

State Regular
Really? I reckon he's underrated if anything.

Heard Border say once he was the bowler he least enjoyed facing.
Almost all the batsman who faced him said he was the most skillful, but if we strictly go by stats he wouldn't be as high. Having said that, with the exception of Davidson, there wasn't left-armer who comes close to his level. I'd put him just below Ambrose, McGrath.

Regarding OP, Steyn more or less surpassed Donald. Unless he has a disastrous drop in form, I think he would end up being the best after Marshall.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Really? I reckon he's underrated if anything.

Heard Border say once he was the bowler he least enjoyed facing.
awta.

Not only border but so many other batsmen of that time would tell you the same thing. Dravid and Lara are 2 that spring to mind immediately.

Ask Donald, Ambrose, and McGrath and they are all unanimous that Wasim was a special bowler and the best of their time. Was so unlucky to get Pakistan fielding. Heck Imran once dropped a catch off him when he was on a hattrick.
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Also belive Akram is over rated, great bowler yes, but in my opinion, not quite up there with the very best. Never once was he rated number one in the world statistically and just took too high a proportion of tailend wickets.
Massively talented though and for many, especially left handers, massively difficult to face. Could do things no one else could.
 
Last edited:

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ya he along with Donald were the best bowlers of that period, imo.

Akram is massively over rated.
Don't see how Wasim was over rated when he was probably the best left arm paceman ever. He sits comfortably among the other great bowlers of the late 80's and 90's but where he ranks is open for argument but to say he was over rated is being unfair to a top class bowler.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
With regards to the thread, Shaun Pollock's record after 68 tests at the end of 2002 was: 278 wickets taken @ 20.71 with a SR of 54.3

That is a ridiculously good record. He was brilliant against everybody except Australia against whom he averaged 27 with and SR of 66 during this time.

Steyn's greatest strength is his off-the-charts SR, but I do think he has benefited from playing very few ODIs as compared to Donald. Also, Donald's action always seemed to me to be a very high risk one, and I kept wondering why he didn't get injured more often. He was incredibly threatening when on song though. I reckon Donald and him are on same ground. Push comes to shove, I will take Steyn, just because of his awe-inspiring record in India (5 games, 26 wickets @ 20.23 and SR 34.5).

I have another good question: After picking Donald and Steyn for the SA XI, would you pick Pollock or Procter for the third paceman (discounting Adcock by assumption :) ) ?
 
Last edited:

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
Don't see how Wasim was over rated when he was probably the best left arm paceman ever. He sits comfortably among the other great bowlers of the late 80's and 90's but where he ranks is open for argument but to say he was over rated is being unfair to a top class bowler.
Even if someone is really good they can still be overrated. People saying someone is overrated doesn't mean they think they're no good, it just means they think they are rated slightly higher than they should be. For instance, Cricinfo viewed him as in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time, while not making room for Ambrose and McGrath even in their second XI. I think that they overrated Akram there personally, but that doesn't mean I don't think he's a great bowler.
 

L Trumper

State Regular
Even if someone is really good they can still be overrated. People saying someone is overrated doesn't mean they think they're no good, it just means they think they are rated slightly higher than they should be. For instance, Cricinfo viewed him as in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time, while not making room for Ambrose and McGrath even in their second XI. I think that they overrated Akram there personally, but that doesn't mean I don't think he's a great bowler.
Nah they went for variety. If what you are losing is very little then going for variety is reasonable choice. Even if I think Ambrose, McGrath are better bowlers, with lillee, marshall in the side I can see their reasoning.
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Even if someone is really good they can still be overrated. People saying someone is overrated doesn't mean they think they're no good, it just means they think they are rated slightly higher than they should be. For instance, Cricinfo viewed him as in the top 3 fast bowlers of all time, while not making room for Ambrose and McGrath even in their second XI. I think that they overrated Akram there personally, but that doesn't mean I don't think he's a great bowler.
Personally don't think that they were saying that he was the third best bowler, but rather as Gideon Haigh put it, only two persons can bowl the new ball, so why have three new ball bowlers, and Wasim was one of the two best ever old ball bowlers, plus he also brought in the element of variation with his left hand fast reverse swingers.
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
With regards to the thread, Shaun Pollock's record after 68 tests at the end of 2002 was: 278 wickets taken @ 20.71 with a SR of 54.3

That is a ridiculously good record. He was brilliant against everybody except Australia against whom he averaged 27 with and SR of 66 during this time.

Steyn's greatest strength is his off-the-charts SR, but I do think he has benefited from playing very few ODIs as compared to Donald. Also, Donald's action always seemed to me to be a very high risk one, and I kept wondering why he didn't get injured more often. He was incredibly threatening when on song though. I reckon Donald and him are on same ground. Push comes to shove, I will take Steyn, just because of his awe-inspiring record in India (5 games, 26 wickets @ 20.23 and SR 34.5).

I have another good question: After picking Donald and Steyn for the SA XI, would you pick Pollock or Procter for the third paceman (discounting Adcock by assumption :) ) ?
Procter for me, no question, more agressive bowler and had greater potential with the bat. Great fielder as well.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
26-25 between Steyn and Donald. That really is a good indicator of how close the contest is between these two. I voted Donald for his aggression although I am a huge fan of Steyn. It would be interesting to see how one feels five years after Steyn us left the stage.

It is always tough comparing cricketers from different times and even more so if one of them is still playing.

By the way, Pollock is far closer to those two than this poll indicates. At his peak he was Donald's equal
 
Last edited:

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
With regards to the thread, Shaun Pollock's record after 68 tests at the end of 2002 was: 278 wickets taken @ 20.71 with a SR of 54.3

That is a ridiculously good record. He was brilliant against everybody except Australia against whom he averaged 27 with and SR of 66 during this time.

Steyn's greatest strength is his off-the-charts SR, but I do think he has benefited from playing very few ODIs as compared to Donald. Also, Donald's action always seemed to me to be a very high risk one, and I kept wondering why he didn't get injured more often. He was incredibly threatening when on song though. I reckon Donald and him are on same ground. Push comes to shove, I will take Steyn, just because of his awe-inspiring record in India (5 games, 26 wickets @ 20.23 and SR 34.5).

I have another good question: After picking Donald and Steyn for the SA XI, would you pick Pollock or Procter for the third paceman (discounting Adcock by assumption :) ) ?
Procter, was at least the equal of all 3 as a bowler, and definitely a better batsman. South Africa is very rich in quality all rounders. Procter, Kallis, Faulkner, Pollock, Barlow, Rice.

26-25 between Steyn and Donald. That really is a good indicator of how close the contest is between these two. I voted Donald for his aggression although I am a huge fan of Steyn. It would be interesting to see how one feels five years after Steyn us left the stage.

It is always tough comparing cricketers from different times and even more so if one of them is still playing.

By the way, Pollock is far closer to those two than this poll indicates. At his peak he was Donald's equal
Thats the problem with polls like these, they give an unrealistic comparison of the players.
 
Last edited:

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Probably we should move posts about Akram in a separate thread. I am interested in discussing how he is assessed. In eyes of many subcontinent casual followers of cricket, he's indeed the greatest thing to have happened to fast bowling. When I have argued with my friends that Akram is not as good as Marshall and few others, I have received only mocking from them. He was great to watch but his record doesn't stand up to the standards of few others when examined closely.
 

Top